"In place of democratic competition, struggles for political office are waged violently in the streets by thugs recruited by politicians," said Peter Takirambudde, Africa director at Human Rights Watch. "Once in office, these politicians use their power to undermine basic human rights and enrich themselves at the expense of Nigeria's impoverished populace" [1].

In 1999, Nigerians hoped for a turn towards democratic governance and respect for human rights. Nigeria’s military lost control of the post-independence government and political power was finally placed into civilian hands, allowing for a democratic election. Unfortunately, since the start of this transition, there has been modest evidence of a government that is of much benefit to the people of Nigeria.  In violent and brazenly rigged polls, government officials have denied millions of Nigerians any real voice in selecting their political leaders [2]. In place of democratic competition, struggles for political office have often been waged violently in the streets by gangs of thugs recruited by politicians, to help them seize control of power. Record-setting oil revenues, which could have been used to tackle poverty and improve access to basic health and education services, have been mismanaged and seized by corruption.

The elections in April 2007 were substantially worse than the dismal elections of 2003, according to elections observers [3]. The persistent party-affiliated violence in the streets contributed to the extremely low voter-turnout and the deaths of at least 300 Nigerians who were victims of violence linked to these elections. Some credible estimates range considerably higher. Prior to the elections, Human Rights Watch interviewed many would-be voters who said that they intended to stay home rather than cast their votes. Several explained this by stating simply, “I don’t want to die”[4].

The rise of political violence has expanded into a problem which extends outside of polling. Several Nigerian states have been plagued by enduring violence after politicians either abandoned or lost control over the gangs they initially employed. As former Oyo State Governor Victor Olunloyo put it, “My attitude towards them [political thugs] is that they are like rabid dogs. They are prepared to bite their owner and their owners cannot be confident or sure of keeping them on a leash” [5]. The architects, sponsors, and perpetrators of this violence generally enjoy complete impunity because of both the powers of intimidation they wield and the tacit acceptance of their conduct by police and government officials [6].

Human Rights Watch reporters interviewed more than twenty current and former members of cult groups. Many spoke candidly about being paid to target the political opponents of their sponsors or to attack and intimidate ordinary voters. “Elections are connected to how much money you have put into your ability to intimidate others” [7].

This rampant official corruption and abuse of human rights abuse can no longer be dismissed as the lingering after-effects of military rule. It cannot be argued that the problems will inevitably be ironed out in the course of some slow transition towards democratic governance, since the election related violence has managed to increase since 2003. Violence, corruption and impunity are not just problems that the government has failed to tackle; they are systemic abuses that flow from the heart of the very same governmental institutions that should be working to combat them.

Human Rights Watch is requesting the launching of transparent, comprehensive, and impartial inquiry into allegations of corruption, vote-rigging, and sponsorship of political violence during Nigeria’s April 2007 elections. Nigeria should propose an amendment to the Constitution that would annul the immunity from all criminal prosecution currently enjoyed by sitting governors. Human Rights Watch is stressing that the police forces of Nigeria should openly acknowledge their obligation to combat political violence and corruption.

The IIJD supports the HRW’s recommendations regarding the strengthening of civil society and the establishment and support of organizations which support transparency and accountability. While their recommendations focus mainly on investigating and prosecuting those responsible for orchestrating acts of political violence, little attention is given to the underlying weaknesses in the institutions of Nigeria. The IIJD believes that the key to establishing democracy and ending corruption require the clear separation of power between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government as well as the strengthening of accountability, transparency, and discipline within the government. A judiciary which lacks independence results in the absence of rule of law which hinders the implementation of laws and judicial decisions. Because there is no separation of power, there are no checks and balances to challenge the government and encourage accountability for those responsible for political violence [8].